Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

King Mob

PDN wrote: »

No, are you disputing that sausage rolls contain preservatives?

See, I can ask irrelevant questions too.

So then it's possible that the apostles could have been convinced of a false miracle to the degree that they would have held that belief until death?

lmaopml

King Mob wrote: »

So then it's possible that the apostles could have been convinced of a false miracle to the degree that they would have held that belief until death?

I'm quite sure that if they had withdrawn their statements, and been total cowards rather than heroes, than they wouldn't have been beheaded, skinned alive, stoned to death, and crucified upside down it would have been a pretty simple affair - the fact is they didn't, even throughout all of that, for hundreds of years people literally clinged to Christ even onto death....and so Western society had the basis of any kind of 'Just' Law, the very beginnings of recognising the value of the human person, and freedom...

What the world needs to deal with is that one man, just one man, Jesus Christ, turned the world upside down and still is present, and remains present - Like it or not - He is!!

We make our choices no better and no worse than any previous generation - except a little more adult - who deals truthfully, and has run out of excuses for not doing so.

That's the difference.

Zombrex

lmaopml wrote: »

I'm quite sure that if they had withdrawn their statements, and been total cowards rather than heroes, than they wouldn't have been beheaded, skinned alive, stoned to death, and crucified upside down it would have been a pretty simple affair - the fact is they didn't

Well no, the fact is that it is relatively easy to get certain people to believe in a cult so much that they happily die for it. Without the claims of the cult being in anyway true.

King Mob

lmaopml wrote: »

I'm quite sure that if they had withdrawn their statements, and been total cowards rather than heroes, than they wouldn't have been beheaded, skinned alive, stoned to death, and crucified upside down it would have been a pretty simple affair - the fact is they didn't, even throughout all of that, for hundreds of years people literally clinged to Christ even onto death....and so Western society had the basis of any kind of 'Just' Law, the very beginnings of recognising the value of the human person, and freedom...

What the world needs to deal with is that one man, just one man, Jesus Christ, turned the world upside down and still is present, and remains present - Like it or not - He is!!

We make our choices no better and no worse than any previous generation - except a little more adult - who deals truthfully, and has run out of excuses for not doing so.

That's the difference.

So then by that logic, Mohammad was also what he claimed to be.
As was Buddha.
As was Krishna.

All of them had profound effects on the world and cultures in exactly the same way Jesus did, some more so and for longer.
Many of their adherents all stuck to them to the end.

So why are these false prophets when they fulfil the same criteria that makes Jesus special?

And how exactly does any of that exclude the possibility that the apostles were simply duped into believing something that isn't true like the believers in thousands of other cults?

You post sounds nice and inspiring and all, but it's devoid of anything to do with the topic of my post, or of anything substantial frankly.

lmaopml

King Mob wrote: »

So then by that logic, Mohammad was also what he claimed to be.
As was Buddha.
As was Krishna.

All of them had profound effects on the world and cultures in exactly the same way Jesus did, some more so and for longer.
Many of their adherents all stuck to them to the end.

So why are these false prophets when they fulfil the same criteria that makes Jesus special?

And how exactly does any of that exclude the possibility that the apostles were simply duped into believing something that isn't true like the believers in thousands of other cults?

You post sounds nice and inspiring and all, but it's devoid of anything to do with the topic of my post, or of anything substantial frankly.

Well, the simple truth is that you are free to explore Krishna and Buddha and any number of various Spiritualities, even the New Age ones, or even 'Religions'...and understand what 'Religion' means as opposed to 'Spirituality'

This is the 'Christian' forum, and right here you will find and debate believers in Christ - that is Jesus Christ - Do you know him too? Do you need to, do you want to? They are the questions - best of luck to you.

King Mob

lmaopml wrote: »

Well, the simple truth is that you are free to explore Krishna and Buddha and any number of various Spiritualities, or even 'Religions'...

This is the 'Christian' forum, and right here you will find and debate believers in Christ - that is Jesus Christ - Do you know him too? Do you need to, do you want to? They are the questions - best of luck to you.

Again, your post bares little relation to my one which it is quoting.

I bring up the other religious figures because they all meet the criteria you listed to show that your religious figure was special and somehow more real.
But you do not believe that any of those other figures are what they claim to be.

Hence your reasoning does not make any sense, and unless you provide something to show that Jesus was any different from other false religious figures, or even from two bit frauds of cult leaders, your point is not convincing.

lmaopml

Zombrex wrote: »

Well no, the fact is that it is relatively easy to get certain people to believe in a cult so much that they happily die for it. Without the claims of the cult being in anyway true.

Zombrex, history tells us that a 'Cult' lives a short life, and dies with it's unfortunate members - Christianity on the other hand has a different history and most Christians who followed Christ inspired by the Holy Spirit died so that others could be able to practice their faith - not for just a few years, but for centuries of torture - Centuries - quite literally, something special happened - you may believe it didn't and think it's all understandable, but I don't!

Today, we face people that don't want to let us just practice too - even though it may be only a Church, and hearing the beautiful Gospel of Christ about humanity. There are at least 100 people who die every week just for attending Church, and that's only the beginning of it - they become Christian nomads in some places because they choose Christ - as much as you don't - they DO! and they are being killed for it.

indioblack

lmaopml wrote: »

Zombrex, history tells us that a 'Cult' lives a short life, and dies with it's unfortunate members - Christianity on the other hand has a different history and most Christians who followed Christ inspired by the Holy Spirit died so that others could be able to practice their faith - not for just a few years, but for centuries of torture - Centuries - quite literally, something special happened - you may believe it didn't and think it's all understandable, but I don't!

Most Christians did not die. Most Christians were obliged to follow their faith because it was less pleasant not to do so. Most Christians did not endure centuries of torture.
The Christian message is powerful and transcends the ages - and I do not regard myself as a Christian - but it does not deserve this over-emotionalsm.

lmaopml

indioblack wrote: »

lmaopml wrote: »

Zombrex, history tells us that a 'Cult' lives a short life, and dies with it's unfortunate members - Christianity on the other hand has a different history and most Christians who followed Christ inspired by the Holy Spirit died so that others could be able to practice their faith - not for just a few years, but for centuries of torture - Centuries - quite literally, something special happened - you may believe it didn't and think it's all understandable, but I don't!

Most Christians did not die. Most Christians were obliged to follow their faith because it was less pleasant not to do so. Most Christians did not endure centuries of torture.
The Christian message is powerful and transcends the ages - and I do not regard myself as a Christian - but it does not deserve this over-emotionalsm.

Well, that's really nice, but rather naive! You don't regard yourself as a Christian but think it's a 'cool message' and people don't die....even now for freedom of practice? Do you hear the news? Do you know about the Churches that are bombed and people who are virtual nomads week in week out in another part of the Globe you live on?

Wake up! We're quite obviously spoiled so much so that we don't even know how hard it was just to attend ourselves - Crazy that people lose site so quick of what 'Freedom' means and can't even see themselves fighting for freedom to praise God in public, but praising a politician or a sports hero ( which I've done myself ) is ok...

Praising God is a human right, it's not human 'tolerance'.

Crazy world.

King Mob

lmaopml wrote: »

Zombrex, history tells us that a 'Cult' lives a short life, and dies with it's unfortunate members - Christianity on the other hand has a different history and most Christians who followed Christ inspired by the Holy Spirit died so that others could be able to practice their faith - not for just a few years, but for centuries of torture - Centuries - quite literally, something special happened - you may believe it didn't and think it's all understandable, but I don't!

Today, we face people that don't want to let us just practice too - even though it may be only a Church, and hearing the beautiful Gospel of Christ about humanity. There are at least 100 people who die every week just for attending Church, and that's only the beginning of it - they become Christian nomads in some places because they choose Christ - as much as you don't - they DO! and they are being killed for it.

So mormonism has lasted for 150 years because?
Islam for 600 years because?
Hinduism for 6000 because?

The followers of each all having endured as much persecution as Christians...

What makes Jesus so different for these other false prophets?

lmaopml

King Mob wrote: »

So mormonism has lasted for 150 years because?
Islam for 600 years because?
Hinduism for 6000 because?

The followers of each all having endured as much persecution as Christians...

What makes Jesus so different for these other false prophets?

Well that would be up to you to know him wouldn't it?

There is an thread for that right here on the forum, to express disbelief V belief in Jesus Christ.

My only involvement here is that human freedom entails freedom to praise Christ as a Christian and live by those virtues that have contributed so much to the foundations of our society.

If one chooses to 'not' believe that by those very same virtues we respect their choices, can you say the same? That's 'freedom' - No society ever did too well by imposing State idealist notions on it's population, they all ended in disaster. Freedom of religion means, from a Catholic perspective protecting anothers right to belief and non belief as far as the State is concerned and to live together in peace.

What other peace could be better?

King Mob

lmaopml wrote: »

Well that would be up to you to know him wouldn't it?

I do not see any difference. That is why I am asking for one to be be shown.
You and other Christians have not been able to so do.

lmaopml wrote: »

There is an thread for that right here on the forum, to express disbelief V belief in Jesus Christ.

Yes, it's this thread. Please actually read what I am writing and address that instead of making odd, nonsensical rants about points I did not make.

King Mob

lmaopml wrote: »

Pml, so I should address your need for conclusive proof, but also recognise that you you weren't asking for it, you just wanted a few pot shots - and not direct you to a very long thread you have no wish to read, i.e. the Atheist V Christianity thread.

Nice! Sincere.

Goodnight

None of this makes any sense.

If you didn't want to, or are unable to address my points in a coherent way, then please do not quote them.

lmaopml

King Mob wrote: »

None of this makes any sense.

If you didn't want to, or are unable to address my points in a coherent way, then please do not quote them.

Ok, I get the feeling that you are a more 'I like to win' guy, even if you are only speaking 'at' somebody, than I like to talk with you guy ...fairly cemented person.

Welcome to the Christianity forum!...Maybe you could become a ...regular...

with enough fuel in the tank, you never know.

Ri na hEireann

lmaopml wrote: »

Ok, I get the feeling that you are a more 'I like to win' guy, even if you are only speaking 'at' somebody, than I like to talk with you guy ...fairly cemented person.

Welcome to the Christianity forum!...Maybe you could become a ...regular...

with enough fuel in the tank, you never know.

I think what he'd like you to do is rather straightforward. Could you point him in the direction of some thing - a unique selling point if you will - that makes you feel you have more reason to believe in Jesus than say Muhammad, David Koresh, Buddha, <insert AN other Prophet here> etc. etc.

Is there a significantly better reason to believe in the veracity of Jesus' claim to divinity than any other God?

lmaopml

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

I think what he'd like you to do is rather straightforward. Could you point him in the direction of some thing - a unique selling point if you will - that makes you feel you have more reason to believe in Jesus than say Muhammad, David Koresh, Buddha, <insert AN other Prophet here> etc. etc.

Is there a significantly better reason to believe in the veracity of Jesus' claim to divinity than any other God?

With the greatest of respect, it's not a gift of mine....you see, I was agnostic, I did the exploring, I was the cynic - I lambasted Christians with words for almost twenty odd years...

I don't think that it's as easy as a 'post' on a forum, like a fairy Godmother granting a wish - I think it requires some sincere reflection, and some soul searching from within....that's probably the best advice I could give.

You see, I know the times I 'searched' to ridicule when I was advised that to 'search' is good by some witnesses of Christ - even my own family..God forgive me......my motive was nothing but good!

You know, maybe that's the path I had to follow - when you are sincere of heart and seek Christ, doors open, understanding dawns and your heart changes..you see from a different perspective....It doesn't mean that we're 'perfect' no..nothing of the sort, but when you give your heart to him in honesty only then, only then will he answer, and quite likely bowl you over with his grace.

No two people are the same. No two people find their way the same, but we do give a testimony and we serve Christ in our neighbour and THAT is communion. Ever wonder where the word 'Community' comes from...it's nice, nice doesn't even cover it really, but it's really special to be a member of Christs community, not always a perfect person, not always utterly bad, but relying on the one who brings about all good things in us.

Ri na hEireann

lmaopml wrote: »

With the greatest of respect, it's not a gift of mine....you see, I was agnostic, I did the exploring, I was the cynic - I lambasted Christians with words for almost twenty odd years...

I don't think that it's as easy as a 'post' on a forum, like a fairy Godmother granting a wish - I think it requires some sincere reflection, and some soul searching from within....that's probably the best advice I could give.

You see, I know the times I 'searched' to ridicule when I was advised that to 'search' is good by some witnesses of Christ - even my own family..God forgive me......my motive was nothing but good!

You know, maybe that's the path I had to follow - when you are sincere of heart and seek Christ, doors open, understanding dawns and your heart changes..you see from a different perspective....It doesn't mean that we're 'perfect' no..nothing of the sort, but when you give your heart to him in honesty only then, only then will he answer, and quite likely bowl you over with his grace.

No two people are the same. No two people find their way the same, but we do give a testimony and we serve Christ in our neighbour and THAT is communion. Ever wonder where the word 'Community' comes from...it's nice, nice doesn't even cover it really, but it's really special to be a member of Christs community, not always a perfect person, not always utterly bad, but relying on the one who brings about all good things in us.

Well, that cleared things up anyway. Oh and obviously answered the question. :rolleyes:

lmaopml

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

Well, that cleared things up anyway. Oh and obviously answered the question. :rolleyes:

Thank you for your appreciation and taking the time out to comment...lol...:D

Edit: And by the way I'm sorry for letting anybody down - I'm just a person -

Tim Robbins

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Why don't you set that trial up first? I've got the pope's number here should you need to call him. It's 555-transubstantiation.

The thing is, I don't believe that the pope or holy water have any inherent special curative properties in and of themselves. So that leads us back to square one - trails that are based upon faulty premises. And why these trials are a waste of money.

You didn't answer the question.

Would you accept such a trial as acceptable scientific evidence that holy water does not work?

If not, what is the faulty premise in this case?

Fanny Cradock

I'm not sure how you could read my post and still be left in the dark as to what my opinion is of your fictional trail.

Did you even read what I wrote?

I don't believe that the pope or holy water have any inherent special curative properties in and of themselves

Tim Robbins

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I'm not sure how you could read my post and still be left in the dark as to what my opinion is of your fictional trail.

Did you even read what I wrote?

I know you don't believe it but that wasn't the question.
Why not just answer the question?

Fanny Cradock

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I know you don't believe it but that wasn't the question.
Why not just answer the question?

Merciful hour! I have answered the question, Tim. Can you not see that? Really?

Ok, in plain English, the answer to your question is...

*Drum roll*

No.

Tim Robbins

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Merciful hour! I have answered the question, Tim. Can you not see that? Really?

Ok, in plain English, the answer to your question is...

*Drum roll*

No.

Why not?

Are you saying it is flawed scientifically why so?

Remember here is the question:

We split a large sample set of people with a similar sickness into groups of equal number.

Group A: Holy water from the Pope - that they know is from the Pope.
Group B: Holy water from the Pope - that they do not know is from the Pope.
Group C: Water that is not from the Pope but they are told is from the Pope.
Group Normal Water
Group E: A placebo
Group F: Nothing.

Happy such a clinical trial would help us conclude Holy Water is useful or useless for Sick people?

PDB, Fanny would you accept evidence for a such a trial for do you think it could still be possible that Holy water could do something? I know you believe it does not but you like me could be wrong.

I would accept it because it is a clinical trial. So, why wouldn't you?

Fanny Cradock

Read my previous posts, Tim. I have addressed your question in more than one post. If you remain confused then please reread what I have written. Now unless you have something further to add I'm leaving it there.

But do get back to me if you get through to Benny.

Tim Robbins

Fanny, you said this:

The thing is, I don't believe that the pope or holy water have any inherent special curative properties in and of themselves. So that leads us back to square one - trails that are based upon faulty premises. And why these trials are a waste of money.

A trial is not based on faulty premises just because you don't believe Holy water has any curative properties.

The point of a clinical trial is not to understand how something but to just have some objective scientific evidence if something can outperform placebos.

If Holy Water does not out perform placebo that confirms your believe and my believe. If it does out perform placebo than it challenges our believes.

What is wrong with that?

Sin City

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Fanny, you said this:


A trial is not based on faulty premises just because you don't believe Holy water has any curative properties.

The point of a clinical trial is not to understand how something but to just have some objective scientific evidence if something can outperform placebos.

If Holy Water does not out perform placebo that confirms your believe and my believe. If it does out perform placebo than it challenges our believes.

What is wrong with that?

Isnt Holy Water said to be from the Pope but isnt a placebo, making both C and E the same thing?

Fanny Cradock

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Fanny, you said this:


A trial is not based on faulty premises just because you don't believe Holy water has any curative properties.

The point of a clinical trial is not to understand how something but to just have some objective scientific evidence if something can outperform placebos.

If Holy Water does not out perform placebo that confirms your believe and my believe. If it does out perform placebo than it challenges our believes.

What is wrong with that?

You should probably read up on what the official line regarding holy water is before you start testing it. It is my understanding that holy water is not used to cure ailments. Rather, holy water is used in a sacrament like baptisms and, in the case of RCism, to ward off evil.

But don't let me stop you, Tim. You don't need my blessing to go out and experiment.

Tim Robbins

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

You should probably read up on what the official line regarding holy water is before you start testing it. It is my understanding that holy water is not used to cure ailments. Rather, holy water is used in a sacrament like baptisms and, in the case of RCism, to ward off evil.

But don't let me stop you, Tim. You don't need my blessing to go out and experiment.

Ok. Keep avoiding the question...

From wiki

Some Catholics believe that water from specific shrines such as the Lourdes Spring are means by which God chooses to bring healing. This water, technically, is not holy water in the same sense as traditional holy water since it has not been consecrated by a priest or bishop

So suppose we wanted to see if Holy water does or does not heal - the Pope may be underestimating the value of his Church - would you accept such a clinical trial that the holy water either helps to cure illness or it does not?

Hopefully we'll get you to answer the question by the end of the day.

PDN

So, atheists want to do tests to see if holy water doesn't do what it doesn't claim to do on the tin anyway?

Fanny Cradock

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Ok. Keep avoiding the question...

From wiki


So suppose we wanted to see if Holy water does or does not heal - the Pope may be underestimating the value of his Church - would you accept such a clinical trial that the holy water either helps to cure illness or it does not?

Hopefully we'll get you to answer the question by the end of the day.

Read your own wiki quote, Tim.

I've answered your question already. God might work though prayers, holy water, people or whatever other method he chooses. But I've already dismissed the notion of a miracles on demand and Divine Slot Machines that you want so desperately to torpedo.

But for the sake of giving you the answer that you clearly want - Yes, I take it back. If your research showed that there was no curative properties associated with holy water (which is exactly in line with RC dogma - read your own link) then I would accept that as evidence towards that which I already believe; that holy water does not in and of itself have special properties.

If your research actually moved into the realm of reality (as opposed to talking about it on a forum) and demonstrated a correlation between healing and holy water then I don't know what I would think - it could be placebo, it could be divine.

Happy?